activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jim Gomes" <e.se...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: KahaDB Protocol Buffers and the future of ActiveMQ
Date Thu, 02 Oct 2008 20:37:10 GMT
I looked in to the protocol buffers a while ago when Jamed first made
mention of them.  Since then, I have not made the time to look too
deeply in to them.  What I remember is that .NET is not directly
supported by Google, but there is a volunteer group that is creating
tools for .NET.

Anyone else played with the .NET tools?


On 10/2/08, Hiram Chirino <hiram@hiramchirino.com> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I've lately been working a new persistence store in the sandbox.  You
> guys can check it out at:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/activemq/sandbox/kahadb
>
> It's similar to the default AMQ store that is used by default today in
> ActiveMQ 5.x, except that it fixes several short commings that we have
> noticed in in the AMQ store.  This new store uses a transaction log,
> but indexes the messages using BTrees which stay consistent on
> restarts which means that store recovery times are very short even
> when there are many messages stored in the database. This work is
> approaching a stable point and I think that this should become the
> default message store for ActiveMQ 6.0.  We need to start beating on
> this to make sure it's rock solid.
>
> While doing this bit of work, I decided to experiment with using
> Google protocol buffers to encode the transaction log records and it
> seems to have worked out well.  I think that we should
> research/evaluate using protocol buffer based default wire format for
> ActiveMQ.   In addition to being able to code generate marshallers for
> many languages, I think we may get some substantial performance
> improvements from using protocol buffers.  So I'm going to create a
> new branch in the sandbox to experiment with changing out the
> wireformat.  Hopefully, the performance gains do manifest themselves
> and we can work on merging those changes back to trunk.
>
> But then this would impact ActiveMQ .NET and CPP....  So I'd be good
> if the .NET and CPP folks could comment on what they think of the
> google protocol buffer stuff that is available for their languages.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
>
> Blog: http://hiramchirino.com
>
> Open Source SOA
> http://open.iona.com
>

Mime
View raw message